• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

what's the worst that can happen depositing an expired check?

I was cleaning out my closet a couple days ago and found a check from about a year ago for $70 (expires in 90 days printed on the check). it's from a major corporation (refund)... what's the worst that can happen if I just slip it into a deposit envelope with some other checks?

would the money just not get deposited, or can you get fined?
 
Originally posted by: tk149
Check will bounce. You pay fees.

This. Intent can't be proved so no fraud, but the bank can bend you over with "bounced check" fees.

 
Legally, I don't think printing "expires in 90 days" actually invalidates the check after 90 days. Nor does writing "VOID" on the check.

Some guy wrote about a big ordeal he had when, as a joke, he deposited a $100k check that had been sent to him in the mail as some kind of promotion. The check said VOID on it. The bank accepted it, put the money in his account, and all was well until it made it to some regional clearinghouse and the routing number was determined to be invalid. Then the bank got pissed at him, understandably, and to cover his own ass he started researching what constitutes a valid check, and he found that just writing "invalid" or "void" or whatever on the check doesn't actually invalidate it. There are certain requirements that have to be met, and if they're all met you have a valid check.

I've heard that some banks won't take checks that are more than 180 days old; not sure if there is any truth to that. If it's a rebate check, they may have closed the account associated with that rebate already, leaving you to pay a fee to your bank. When I deposited a NSF check at my bank a few years ago, they charged me $15. This was a check that someone else wrote to me.
 
Originally posted by: mugs
Legally, I don't think printing "expires in 90 days" actually invalidates the check after 90 days. Nor does writing "VOID" on the check.

Some guy wrote about a big ordeal he had when, as a joke, he deposited a $100k check that had been sent to him in the mail as some kind of promotion. The check said VOID on it. The bank accepted it, put the money in his account, and all was well until it made it to some regional clearinghouse and the routing number was determined to be invalid. Then the bank got pissed at him, understandably, and to cover his own ass he started researching what constitutes a valid check, and he found that just writing "invalid" or "void" or whatever on the check doesn't actually invalidate it. There are certain requirements that have to be met, and if they're all met you have a valid check.

I've heard that some banks won't take checks that are more than 180 days old; not sure if there is any truth to that. If it's a rebate check, they may have closed the account associated with that rebate already, leaving you to pay a fee to your bank. When I deposited a NSF check at my bank a few years ago, they charged me $15. This was a check that someone else wrote to me.

it wasn't void, it was written as "non-negotiable".

i think void would actually void the check.
 
Originally posted by: ivan2
Originally posted by: mugs
Legally, I don't think printing "expires in 90 days" actually invalidates the check after 90 days. Nor does writing "VOID" on the check.

Some guy wrote about a big ordeal he had when, as a joke, he deposited a $100k check that had been sent to him in the mail as some kind of promotion. The check said VOID on it. The bank accepted it, put the money in his account, and all was well until it made it to some regional clearinghouse and the routing number was determined to be invalid. Then the bank got pissed at him, understandably, and to cover his own ass he started researching what constitutes a valid check, and he found that just writing "invalid" or "void" or whatever on the check doesn't actually invalidate it. There are certain requirements that have to be met, and if they're all met you have a valid check.

I've heard that some banks won't take checks that are more than 180 days old; not sure if there is any truth to that. If it's a rebate check, they may have closed the account associated with that rebate already, leaving you to pay a fee to your bank. When I deposited a NSF check at my bank a few years ago, they charged me $15. This was a check that someone else wrote to me.

it wasn't void, it was written as "non-negotiable".

i think void would actually void the check.

You're right that it said non-negotiable, but I don't know if you're right that "void" would be any more effective than "non-negotiable." Since that's not really the topic of the thread I'm willing to live with not knowing, but your post prompted me to find the story:

http://www.goodthink.com/writi...es.cfm?id=11&page_id=2

The relevant section:

Uuggh! Reading a big thick law book. Suddenly I knew why law students always looked so beat and tired. I didn't know how I was going to find anything in the monstroserous tome in front of me, and then my eyes caught sight of a small pocket sized book titled, Negotiable Instruments and Check Collection . It was a heaven sent guide for laymen. And plain as day, it listed the nine criteria for a negotiable instrument. I flipped it open and as if by magic, I found myself staring at a page that read, "The Nine Criteria for a Negotiable Instrument." I dove in reading with ferocious intensity.

The first eight criteria went my way. Things like, must have a signature, a date, the words "pay to," - all the things you expect to see on a check. The check I deposited had all the right features however it also carried the words "non-negotiable" in the top right hand corner. Hopefully the ninth point would address this. It said, "The ninth issue is whether people can create an instrument that matches the first eight criteria, and then avoid negotiability by declaring on the instrument that it is not negotiable."

I took a deep breath. The roulette wheel was spinning to a stop, giving me a fifty-fifty chance at a hundred grand. I began reading the next sentence slower than any sentence I've read in my life, my finger uncovering one word at a time. "No, give me the word no," I said to myself.


"The... answer... is... ...yes."

Wham. Ugh. Game over.

Any fantasies I had about the $95,000 dollars fizzled. But then, I moved my finger a micro-inch further, and saw a comma. "The answer is yes, except on a check." It went on:

"A declaration on a check that it is not negotiable is ineffective.? The meaning of this sunk in quickly - I was the luckiest S.O.B. alive. The get-rich-quick company had accidentally designed a real check - and I had deposited it!

He doesn't list all 9 criteria, but it seems logical that if "a declaration on a check that it is not negotiable is ineffective," then declaring it void would similarly be ineffective.

I remember the story being somewhat interesting, but not quite interesting enough to justify its length. If you're bored, it's something to do.

I think I read that story when I was an intern after my sophomore year of college, so it's been almost 10 years... my recollection was pretty close. 😛
 
Originally posted by: joshsquall
So did the guy get to keep the $95k?

Go to www.rot13.com and paste this in if you want to know:

Jrqarfqnl, Bpgbore 4, 1995 - 12:45 NZ

Nf gur arjf jvqryl ercbegrq guvf qnl, V erghearq gur pnfuvre'f purpx gb zl onax orpnhfr V svanyyl tbg jung V jnagrq -- gur yrggre bs rkcynangvba naq rkbarengvba. V ernyvmr gung ernpgvbaf gb zl ergheavat gur purpx jvyy or zvkrq. Fbzr jvyy frr vg nf ivpgbel sbe gur yvggyr crefba, juvyr bguref jvyy frr guvf svany puncgre nf n yrg qbja.

Or go here and read the ending:
http://www.goodthink.com/writi...s.cfm?id=11&page_id=14
 
According to his webpage he did, but I can't find anythign on Snopes about it... it seems pretty insane.
 
You might edit the spoiler in case someone wants to read the story 😉

Originally posted by: Auggie
but I can't find anythign on Snopes about it... it seems pretty insane.

He claims to have been interviewed on national television and that his story was printed in 300 newspapers including the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times. That stuff should be easy to verify.


Edit: verified:
http://www.nytimes.com/1995/08...ustomer-s-account.html
http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-sear...😀&s_trackval=GooglePM

http://news.google.com/archive...a=N&sugg=d&btnG=Search

I've put way too much effort into this thread.
 
You can certainly go ahead and deposit the check. The only problem that will occur is if the company has already canceled that check with their bank. Banks don't really honor those "Void in 90 days" statements on the checks anyway. My company has had an instance where a bank honored a check even though it wasn't signed (it was a legit check but the fact they honored it without the signature is pretty scary and I'm sure they got hell for it.).
 
I brought an expired rebate check to my bank and the manager said they'd put it through anyway and see if it came back. It went through fine. 😛
 
Originally posted by: loki8481
I was cleaning out my closet a couple days ago and found a check from about a year ago for $70 (expires in 90 days printed on the check). it's from a major corporation (refund)... what's the worst that can happen if I just slip it into a deposit envelope with some other checks?

would the money just not get deposited, or can you get fined?

99.9% it goes through fine
 
Back
Top